Lowly Crew

Anarchy is Hate Speech

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Editor said:

fuck yes it is.

yesse it is......                                        :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought Alan Rickman died?

Or are you referring to Snappen??? Aka you understand. In Dutch.... as in its all Dutch to me???

Yes? No? Maybe? Ask again later?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here we go.  After WWII everyone said "we'll never go down that road again" and yet, here we are.  Start restricting the freedom of speech and expression and you start the slow, frog boiling move towards atrocity.

 

“One has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws.”
― Martin Luther King, Jr., Letter from Birmingham Jail

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to be clear, that’s in Canada, where people were never really free anyway, on account of their national health care system. 

  • Like 5
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's Canada - that symbol is impolite.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, socalrider said:

Just to be clear, that’s in Canada, where people were never really free anyway, on account of their national health care system. 

Looks like you should've used purple font.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hamilton is 2h 35m from Michigan border

any know where Clean is?

         |

        V

epaselect-usa-uc-berekely-protest.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I played a hockey tournament near Hamilton once. Near Verona. Went snowmobiling whenever we weren't playing hockey. Anarchy hadn't been invented yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, fastyacht said:

This is the difference between the U.S. and all other "free" countries.

You have plenty of that sort of political correctness stupidity in the States.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, SloopJonB said:

You have plenty of that sort of political correctness stupidity in the States.

fify

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought it had something to do with b00bs

 

57723e710639f016f7abcf6293f1bf3f--curvy-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really, the same Canada where these guys come from?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, fastyacht said:

I played a hockey tournament near Hamilton once. Near Verona. Went snowmobiling whenever we weren't playing hockey. Anarchy hadn't been invented yet.

Are there two Veronas in Ontario?  I grew up near Verona, but it's at the other end of the lake from Hamilton, or about a 3-3.5 hour drive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So there is background to this story..... earlier in the  year this happened.... 

 which  should not happen to  any  business   for any reason.      Now on the back of  my 5 knot shit box I sport the  flag of SA....  and  is in Hamilton...   it wont come off...LOL   been on the boat  to long.....

IMG_1972a.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, 2351 said:

it should buff out .......  what is it on in that pic ?

its a 1978 C&C Mega 30   proto type Fixed keel. 

15036590_10155383341583998_4264235328622460686_n.jpg

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Winston905 said:

its a 1978 C&C Mega 30   proto type Fixed keel. 

15036590_10155383341583998_4264235328622460686_n.jpg

I owned one for a few years. It reminded me of one of my old girlfriends, looked good from the side but not so good from the front (or back)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, anarchy is a movement so broad that it is difficult to categorize. 

Social anarchy is all about equality and freedom sans private property. Most are pacifist. 

Some of the individualistic/egoistic/nihilistic anarchists, on the other hand, like Max Stirner, were pretty much the opposite. 

So no, the circle A is not hate speech, though one can understand how the Ungovernables' neighbors might be a tad upset . .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, socalrider said:

Just to be clear, that’s in Canada, where people were never really free anyway, on account of their national health care system. 

We were certainly better off before Hairdoo's daddy rewrote the constitution in 1982.

3 hours ago, Winston905 said:

 Now on the back of  my 5 knot shit box I sport the  flag of SA....  and  is in Hamilton...   it wont come off...LOL   been on the boat  to long.....

IMG_1972a.jpg

Uhhhhh and where do I get one of those stickers?  My 5KSB needs one as well :D

2 hours ago, AJ Oliver said:

Yeah, anarchy is a movement so broad that it is difficult to categorize. 

Social anarchy is all about equality and freedom sans private property. Most are pacifist. 

Some of the individualistic/egoistic/nihilistic anarchists, on the other hand, like Max Stirner, were pretty much the opposite. 

So no, the circle A is not hate speech, though one can understand how the Ungovernables' neighbors might be a tad upset . .

Actually, the word "Anarchy" literally translates from ancient Greek to mean "Without Rulers".  The whole "social anarchy" thing is bullshit because not having possessions violates natural law.  You own your body, for example.  You get to do what you want with it.  Nobody gets to tell you what you can do with your body.  It is the most basic and intrinsic piece property you own.  From that comes your time and labour, which are also intrinsic to your body.  You trade your time an labour for money which you can then trade for goods and services.  It's all pretty basic and simple stuff.  It starts getting complicated when you start involving society and how much of your "body" you should have to give up in order to maintain society (a conversation I don't really feel like getting into).

I have always really loved this image.

anarchy-is-not-chaos.jpg.296dbf0cee9ee70cca2d3c76b52e4e79.jpg

Super interesting topic and a great thought exercise but I find discussing it on the interwebs (and in person) usually results in a shit flinging contest.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, socalrider said:

Just to be clear, that’s in Canada, where people were never really free anyway, on account of their national health care system. 

Not sure what you mean by this but the US spends twice as much per capita on health care as the UK and Canada but have a lower life expectancy. You could go to Chile spend a fifth of what you do on healthcare and live longer. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Tempest said:

Actually, the word "Anarchy" literally translates from ancient Greek to mean "Without Rulers".  The whole "social anarchy" thing is bullshit because not having possessions violates natural law.  You own your body, for example.  You get to do what you want with it.  Nobody gets to tell you what you can do with your body.  It is the most basic and intrinsic piece property you own.  From that comes your time and labour, which are also intrinsic to your body.  You trade your time an labour for money which you can then trade for goods and services.  It's all pretty basic and simple stuff.  It starts getting complicated when you start involving society and how much of your "body" you should have to give up in order to maintain society (a conversation I don't really feel like getting into).

Thankfully someone here actually knows what anarchy is instead of just twisting it into some commie bullshit about 'no possessions'

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, SloopJonB said:

You have plenty of that sort of political correctness stupidity in the States.

Ah, but you can't be jailed here for speech. In Canada or pretty much all other countries in Europe, you can be jailed for ideas. Here, it takes actions or credible threats to life.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, NautiGirl said:

Are there two Veronas in Ontario?  I grew up near Verona, but it's at the other end of the lake from Hamilton, or about a 3-3.5 hour drive.

Small world. It's been a long time. Maybe it wasn't so close. We lost 20-1 in one game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Tink said:

Not sure what you mean by this but the US spends twice as much per capita on health care as the UK and Canada but have a lower life expectancy. You could go to Chile spend a fifth of what you do on healthcare and live longer. 

Hey guys, I got one!  :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Tempest said:

We were certainly better off before Hairdoo's daddy rewrote the constitution in 1982.

Oh puhleeze!.

You preferred being a Colonial?

Do you want the Red Ensign back as well?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, fastyacht said:

Ah, but you can't be jailed here for speech. In Canada or pretty much all other countries in Europe, you can be jailed for ideas. Here, it takes actions or credible threats to life.

Give me 1/2 dozen examples of Canadians who have been jailed over speech.

That "American Exceptionalism" attitude about how free you are compared to other civilized countries is an unwarranted conceit.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, SloopJonB said:

Give me 1/2 dozen examples of Canadians who have been jailed over speech.

That "American Exceptionalism" attitude about how free you are compared to other civilized countries is an unwarranted conceit.

Off the top of my head, I remember vaguely a case of a teacher or a professor who was jailed.

Nevertheless, successful prosecution of speech is real in Canada.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/when-is-it-hate-speech-7-significant-canadian-cases-1.1036731

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, SloopJonB said:

Give me 1/2 dozen examples of Canadians who have been jailed over speech.

That "American Exceptionalism" attitude about how free you are compared to other civilized countries is an unwarranted conceit.

The best thing to do about people who ‘think they are superior’ is just to have a little inner chuckle, we know the truth Canada, that’s why we are headed to Whistler no Aspen this Winter.

I once asked a top doctor why he didn’t go and work in America for a lot more money, he simply replied ‘I like living in a civilised society where we care for one another’ clearly referring to our health service but I think it applies in a wider context also. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, socalrider said:

Hey guys, I got one!  :)

Grr remembered why I don’t come on this forum, nothing to do with sailing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anarchy was when SA was all on one forum and not broken up into a bunch of smaller forums.

Great fun that was.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Tink said:

The best thing to do about people who ‘think they are superior’ is just to have a little inner chuckle, we know the truth Canada, that’s why we are headed to Whistler no Aspen this Winter.

I once asked a top doctor why he didn’t go and work in America for a lot more money, he simply replied ‘I like living in a civilised society where we care for one another’ clearly referring to our health service but I think it applies in a wider context also. 

Even the most beautiful woman will have "flaws." So too with Canada. A beautiful lovely country, because of its people primarily, but she has her quirks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, fastyacht said:

Off the top of my head, I remember vaguely a case of a teacher or a professor who was jailed.

Nevertheless, successful prosecution of speech is real in Canada.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/when-is-it-hate-speech-7-significant-canadian-cases-1.1036731

I can live with it.

Imagine if those assholes had guns.

By the way, Keegstra was a teacher and was teaching his shit to schoolchildren - not a free speech situation at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, SloopJonB said:

I can live with it.

Imagine if those assholes had guns.

By the way, Keegstra was a teacher and was teaching his shit to schoolchildren - not a free speech situation at all.

We had a mass School shooting here in the UK over twenty years ago, tightened up gun law, haven’t had one since.

I am sure the 1.5million US citizens killed by guns since 1968 don’t enjoy much freedom. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SloopJonB said:

I can live with it.

Imagine if those assholes had guns.

By the way, Keegstra was a teacher and was teaching his shit to schoolchildren - not a free speech situation at all.

Yes, I understand that.

But here's the difference. In the US, you get fired. In Canada, you can go to jail.

Whatever the "prevailing interests" of the state are, as determined first by the Canadian legislatures and backed up or overturned by the Canadian courts, is the law--there is no 1st Amendment protection of freedom of expression. Therefore ideas are subject to criminalization. This is no small thing. But of course it doesn't stop me from enjoying Canada and Canadians. It is just something rather significantly unusual about the US Constitution. That I see it as favourable on the US side is perhaps parochial but I really don't think so. I think it is more significant than that. The very idea that sovereignty of the state is secondary to the natural rights of an individual is fundamental to the US founding documents--specifically the Declaration of Independence, and the Bill of Rights. The Constitution itself is far more mechanical but brilliant for many other reasons. It never would have worked out without that critical period from 1783 through 1787 though,. An alignment of the heavens occurred, Washington was ultimately swayed to come back into public life, and the rest is history. What the US was in 1785 never would have amounted to anything. What we had in 1789 was something great.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, SloopJonB said:

Oh puhleeze!.

You preferred being a Colonial?

Do you want the Red Ensign back as well?

Ha, not particularly but our property rights were a little less vulnerable to the power of the state, as I understand it.  Would be nice if squatters rights were still a thing considering the vast tracts of crown land in BC.  Would be nice to be able to homestead and then take ownership of the land you had worked for years.  I woulda built a cabin 10 years ago.  There were lots of things deeply ingrained in common law that we lost with the over arching power of acts and statutes now in place.

18 hours ago, SloopJonB said:

Give me 1/2 dozen examples of Canadians who have been jailed over speech.

That "American Exceptionalism" attitude about how free you are compared to other civilized countries is an unwarranted conceit.

Things are taking off and the years to come are going to be interesting.  This hate speech bullshit being ingrained in law is the opening of the flood gates and my bet is that things are going to get worse before they get better.

2 hours ago, fastyacht said:

Even the most beautiful woman will have "flaws." So too with Canada. A beautiful lovely country, because of its people primarily, but she has her quirks.

1 hour ago, SloopJonB said:

I can live with it.

Imagine if those assholes had guns.

By the way, Keegstra was a teacher and was teaching his shit to schoolchildren - not a free speech situation at all.

Lot's of guns in Canada.  There's a big dividing line between people saying things that are NOW considered hate speech and going out and shooting a bunch of people.  Free speech is important because it subjects ideas to the court of public opinion.  If you start punishing people for the things they say, and not their actions, you're going to drive these bad ideas underground and that's where they will flourish. 

32 minutes ago, Tink said:

We had a mass School shooting here in the UK over twenty years ago, tightened up gun law, haven’t had one since.

I am sure the 1.5million US citizens killed by guns since 1968 don’t enjoy much freedom. 

Violent crime has been rising in the UK for decades.  Taking the guns away hasn't done much to save lives. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, fastyacht said:

Yes, I understand that.

But here's the difference. In the US, you get fired. In Canada, you can go to jail.

Whatever the "prevailing interests" of the state are, as determined first by the Canadian legislatures and backed up or overturned by the Canadian courts, is the law--there is no 1st Amendment protection of freedom of expression. Therefore ideas are subject to criminalization. This is no small thing. But of course it doesn't stop me from enjoying Canada and Canadians. It is just something rather significantly unusual about the US Constitution. That I see it as favourable on the US side is perhaps parochial but I really don't think so. I think it is more significant than that. The very idea that sovereignty of the state is secondary to the natural rights of an individual is fundamental to the US founding documents--specifically the Declaration of Independence, and the Bill of Rights. The Constitution itself is far more mechanical but brilliant for many other reasons. It never would have worked out without that critical period from 1783 through 1787 though,. An alignment of the heavens occurred, Washington was ultimately swayed to come back into public life, and the rest is history. What the US was in 1785 never would have amounted to anything. What we had in 1789 was something great.

The US constitution is an absolutely brilliant document.  The founding fathers would be spinning in their graves if they knew what the US had become.  Not sure if the current system is what they had in mind.  Back in those days everyone knew the laws and law was taught in school as a fundamental part of making your way in the world.  The laws were easier to understand and people were able to take more responsibility for their actions as well as guide guide government with a deeper understanding of it's inner workings.  Somewhere along the line things went sideways.  The system was corrupted, obfuscated and, ultimately polluted.  There's a good argument for the banking sector having something to do with it...

"I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country.
A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit.
Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the nation,
therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men.
We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely
controlled and dominated governments in the civilized world.
No longer a government by free opinion, no longer a government by
conviction and the vote of the majority, but a government by
the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men."
~Woodrow Wilson

Oh, and "parochial", well played.  Good word :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:-)

Interesting bringing up Wilson.
Two somewhat random points there.

1. He stabbed blacks in the back, from a rights standpoint.

2. He was president during the signing into law the very fundamental changes that he rues in that quotation. 1913 (his first year in office) was a very important year. You might look at the US constitution as Pre 1913 and Post 1913....certainly from a banking standpoint. But also the Senate became a direct elected body.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, fastyacht said:

Yes, I understand that.

But here's the difference. In the US, you get fired. In Canada, you can go to jail.

Whatever the "prevailing interests" of the state are, as determined first by the Canadian legislatures and backed up or overturned by the Canadian courts, is the law--there is no 1st Amendment protection of freedom of expression. Therefore ideas are subject to criminalization. This is no small thing. But of course it doesn't stop me from enjoying Canada and Canadians. It is just something rather significantly unusual about the US Constitution. That I see it as favourable on the US side is perhaps parochial but I really don't think so. I think it is more significant than that. The very idea that sovereignty of the state is secondary to the natural rights of an individual is fundamental to the US founding documents--specifically the Declaration of Independence, and the Bill of Rights. The Constitution itself is far more mechanical but brilliant for many other reasons. It never would have worked out without that critical period from 1783 through 1787 though,. An alignment of the heavens occurred, Washington was ultimately swayed to come back into public life, and the rest is history. What the US was in 1785 never would have amounted to anything. What we had in 1789 was something great.

I agree - free speech means the right to piss someone off - without that you have polite conversation. I haven't seen anything happen here that concerns me though. Keegstra, Zundel and their elk can rot in a hole for all I care. Zundel got deported to Germany IIRC.

Scum.

The real difference between our Constitutions is in the wording of the fundamental rights

America has Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.

Canada has Peace, Order and Good Government. :rolleyes:

Which one would you guess was written by lifer bureaucrats. :D

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anarchists getting run up the pole for "hate speech" in Hamilton? Couldn't happen to a nicer bunch of fellows that.

It's inevitable that the SJW crowd in Canada will ultimately be hoisted firmly upon their own petard. Sooner or later the radical left will always eat its own.

Those knobs are protesting gentrification in Hamilton, they do so by smashing up independant businesses who have invested time, energy and money in their community. Their shortsightedness cannot be overestimated.

Despite current hysteria and turmoil, at a constitutional level, USA has the much better system. Our government is working overtime to fuck up our system by affronting personal liberty. Americans take note, you have the best system of personal liberty in the world. Read DeTouqueville again and again and appreciate what you have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Tempest said:

Ha, not particularly but our property rights were a little less vulnerable to the power of the state, as I understand it.  Would be nice to be able to homestead and then take ownership of the land you had worked for years. 

Homesteading was done away with in B.C. by the Barrett government in the early 70's not the Charter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Tempest said:

 The laws were easier to understand and people were able to take more responsibility for their actions as well as guide guide government with a deeper understanding of it's inner workings. 

That's the good old days talking.

Do you seriously think that a W. VA. coal miner in 1880 or a Montana cowboy or a serf in a garment factory BITD had "a deeper understanding of it's inner workings". 

Or even voted?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, SloopJonB said:

That's the good old days talking.

Do you seriously think that a W. VA. coal miner in 1880 or a Montana cowboy or a serf in a garment factory BITD had "a deeper understanding of it's inner workings". 

Or even voted?

Adgreede!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This discussion reminds me of a joke: 

 

A Scotsman, a Canadian and an American die in a car crash and go up to meet St Peter.  

St Peter says, "you guys have been *pretty* good, but don't quite make the cut.  So I'm going to grant you one last wish before sending you to hell for all eternity."

Scotsman says, "I'd like to drink the finest bottle of single malt whisky before I go"

Canadian says, "I would like to deliver a lecture on the history and structure of our Canadian federal constitutional monarchy"

American says, "I would like to be sent to hell *before* said lecture is delivered"

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, SloopJonB said:

Homesteading was done away with in B.C. by the Barrett government in the early 70's not the Charter

Interesting.  I was under the impression that squatters rights died with the constitution act of 1982.  To be honest, I'm a little out of practice with the legal stuff as I started to find discussing it was a waste of time.  Arguing with people was and, to an extent, still does detract from the quality of my life.

2 hours ago, SloopJonB said:

That's the good old days talking.

Do you seriously think that a W. VA. coal miner in 1880 or a Montana cowboy or a serf in a garment factory BITD had "a deeper understanding of it's inner workings". 

Or even voted? 

Do you think those people have any sort of understanding today?  I'm guessing a lot more of them vote now.  I see your point thought.  I think democracy is probably as broken now as it was then.  It will always be a few people telling the majority how to live their lives.  I don't vote anymore... I'd rather be sailing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Tempest said:

 I don't vote anymore... I'd rather be sailing.

Then you have forfeited your right to an opinion on political matters.

Voting is the absolute minimum duty of a citizen.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SloopJonB said:

Then you have forfeited your right to an opinion on political matters.

Voting is the absolute minimum duty of a citizen.

Do you have an opinion on US political matters?  Saying I don't have a right to an opinion because I have very consciously decided not to take part in the political insanity we call democracy is, at the very least, myopic and at worst, irresponsible.  Is there a better way to ensure you end up in an echo chamber?  Voting for the lesser of the evils is still a vote for evil and the current voting system provides you with nothing more than the illusion of choice.  I think Frank Zappa said it best:  "Politics is the entertainment division of the military industrial complex."

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or, alternatively, %42 of the eligible voting public in the U.S. 2016 elections have 'forfeited their right to an opinion' on political matters...pretty stark punishment for an already disenfranchised voting public. 

In countries with a compulsory voting system, one might be more inclined to characterize voting as a civic duty. (There are still abstain clauses in certain countries, but you've gotta show up at the polls to abstain). In non-compulsory free elections, the vote is, broadly, considered more of a civil right than a civic duty. Abstaining  is considered exercising part of the 'right to vote'.

So, does exercising one's right to not vote preclude them from exercising other rights such as free assembly and free speech? In a modern society that wears such a thin veil of representative democracy, I hope not.

It would be interesting to hear from de Tocqueville in the modern day. (A documentary was made retracing his journey through modern America a number of years ago). What would he think of the electoral college? What grade would this so-called representative democracy be given? What would he have to say about the prison systems and criminal codes today verses the systems he was sent to study in his day? Though he was optimistic about the future of democracy, he also had his reservations. Would his 'tyranny of the majority' fears resemble the current rise of populism?

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't even think it is a question.

Your vote is your choice. Your rights come before that. The government's soveriegnty rests upon the citizen not hte other waty raoyud.

It is merely polemics to make statements about a person beoing "unworthy blahblah" because he don't vote...

To take that seruiously would be troubling indeed.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, fastyacht said:

I don't even think it is a question.

Your vote is your choice. Your rights come before that. The government's soveriegnty rests upon the citizen not hte other waty raoyud.

It is merely polemics to make statements about a person beoing "unworthy blahblah" because he don't vote...

To take that seruiously would be troubling indeed.

People often believe that their rights come from the government as opposed to being RECOGNIZED by government.  You have your inalienable human rights whether the current government recognizes them or not.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Tempest said:

Do you have an opinion on US political matters?

I vote here so that gives me worldwide access to bitch about politics. :D

Not voting and then complaining about political matters is like a man pushing his opinion on abortion. If you don't pay you can't play.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, SloopJonB said:

I vote here so that gives me worldwide access to bitch about politics. :D

Not voting and then complaining about political matters is like a man pushing his opinion on abortion. If you don't pay you can't play.

Actually voting is the "low hanging fruit" and "easy participation" part. The idea that it is the most influential part is a conceit. The *real* play is activism--in any form. Organizing, running for office, working on a campaign, persuasion etc. That is far more valuable from a "pay to play" standpoint than your simple vote. Arguably your vote really doesn''t count, if you don't participate more actively in seeking and supporting candidates--not merely voting for them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I said that voting is the MINIMUM duty of a citizen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Same Dipshits who spent three million dollars for this piece of crap 2 years ago which promptly sunk. Now we are all stuck on the Hard,

Breakwall.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, SloopJonB said:

I said that voting is the MINIMUM duty of a citizen.

No. See that is simply not true AT ALL. It is not a DUTY whatsoever. It is a choice to do or not. We have a secret ballot...

The minimum duty is to obey the laws as enacted by democratically elected legislature...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, madtom said:

Same Dipshits who spent three million dollars for this piece of crap 2 years ago which promptly sunk. Now we are all stuck on the Hard,

Breakwall.jpg

That would be the Hamilton Yacht Club Optimist Pram Dinghy Doc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/16/2018 at 3:34 PM, Mark Set said:

Thankfully someone here actually knows what anarchy is instead of just twisting it into some commie bullshit about 'no possessions'

Xactalcally!  On the continuum of pure political theory, anarchy is the exact opposite of communism.  In an anarchic state, there are no laws.  In a communist state, the government controls/owns everything (material).  Libertarian-ism is a cousin to anarchy.  Socialism is essentially communism light.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why didn't they just use an old barge like they do here?

Cheap, effective and durable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

they ever asked us just, decided, maybe we might know from spending more time on the harbor than anyone else. ask an engineer and take the Largest fresh water port in the great lakes,  the best and most qualified marine infrastructure company within a kilometer , cranes that can pick that piece of bullshit out of the water, but no we wait, anarchy is not our problem trust me I had a rock thrown through my building one stupid idiot. That was a vandalism. idiot got put i jail and guess what no more anarchy.. They are still believing in the idiots who built this piece of shit, we all went Ok that doesn't look good or like it's gonna last but wtf  barge option, sunk ship pier that's the answer but no, dick fucks are fucking around. I got races to sail and and shit. we only have a 4-5  month season at best  I' m so fucking pissed off. Total shit show. oh next week we will tell you.. fuck

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now that's what I call apoplectic.  :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, madtom said:

SNIP>  last but wtf  barge option, sunk ship pier that's the answer but no, dick fucks are fucking around.  <SNIP

In Philadelphia, there are some quays and fingers that are old Victory ships.

I think this is the one I remember. Not much left of it but been there a long time.

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0211139,-75.0227051,151m/data=!3m1!1e3

Capture2.JPG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/16/2018 at 10:05 PM, fastyacht said:

Ah, but you can't be jailed here for speech. In Canada or pretty much all other countries in Europe, you can be jailed for ideas. Here, it takes actions or credible threats to life.

...well you got a president that lies every times he open his moth or use his phone - and media outlets that makes Russian propaganda looks like amateurs - maybe just a little responsibility of what you say can be good anyway? 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, SeaGul said:

...well you got a president that lies every times he open his moth or use his phone - and media outlets that makes Russian propaganda looks like amateurs - maybe just a little responsibility of what you say can be good anyway? 

 

Sure. But what would you rather have? Thought police?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, fastyacht said:

Sure. But what would you rather have? Thought police?

Dont you have that already?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes Ive been there .... long time ago - but we -as you see- have net...

 

 

Think most would consider law enforcement in US to be rather rough...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, SeaGul said:

Yes Ive been there .... long time ago - but we -as you see- have net...

 

 

Think most would consider law enforcement in US to be rather rough...

Define "most."
Law enforcement has nothing to do with free speech or "thought police."


Not understanding your phrase, " - but we -as you see- have net..."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, SeaGul said:

Think most would consider law enforcement in US to be rather rough...

Law enforcement is variable, which is a separate issue... 

Enumerated rights per US "Bill of Rights" (first ten amendments to US Constitution) are held very highly, though there are periodic attempts to erode them by those who's feelings are hurt... 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, fastyacht said:

Define "most."
Law enforcement has nothing to do with free speech or "thought police."


Not understanding your phrase, " - but we -as you see- have net..."

Fast - it is an American conceit to think that you are more free than other developed democracies.

In many ways we are more free than you -

we are free of worry about our kids being gunned down at school.

We are free of worry about being held at gunpoint during routine traffic stops.

We are free of hackers screwing with our paper ballot and pen election system.

Just for example.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many US commentators say that US now is more an oligarchy than democracy. Politicians are legally corrupt and obey their donors not the voters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites